[ghoulishfright]

[scythemantis]

Actually, this is better than I could have hoped because even if the movie isn't great, it's spurring geeks to show their true colors.

Everyone who rages and froths about this movie is another person I know to avoid. It isn't even always about gender - the type of person who feels actual anger and hurt over a reboot being too different is the kind of person I don't need to associate with because they clearly aren't capable of sorting their emotional priorities and haven't matured past ten years old. Nostalgic geek culture is pure poison. Even without its sexism and racism (which very definitely exist,) the fetishistic obsession over 80's properties already went too far and makes people look pathetic.

I like ghostbusters because it's fun. It's not a damn RELIGION.

[venkman30]

Another bash on ppl that don't like this? Really? I'm sorry but the non haters are just as bad as the haters. They voice their opinion and name call just as much. Neither side is right. Thank you to every form of media for turning a beloved franchise into a hate vs non hate war. As to the original post. It's creative. I'll give it that. I did get a chuckle out of it.

[scythemantis]

Who's bashing people for not liking the reboot?

I'm bashing PURISTS. The worst of all fans, in all fandoms. People who get angry that reboots or spinoffs or changes exist at all. People who are elitist over their nostalgia and their childhood memories. They add nothing of value and ruin every fan community they touch.

[JurorNo.2]

Nostalgic geek culture is pure poison. Even without its sexism and racism (which very definitely exist,) the fetishistic obsession over 80's properties already went too far and makes people look pathetic.

I like ghostbusters because it's fun. It's not a damn RELIGION.

It just goes to show that sentimentality has both its good side, and its ugly side.

[Egon's Pompadour]

Actually, this is better than I could have hoped because even if the movie isn't great, it's spurring geeks to show their true colors.

Everyone who rages and froths about this movie is another person I know to avoid. It isn't even always about gender - the type of person who feels actual anger and hurt over a reboot being too different is the kind of person I don't need to associate with because they clearly aren't capable of sorting their emotional priorities and haven't matured past ten years old. Nostalgic geek culture is pure poison. Even without its sexism and racism (which very definitely exist,) the fetishistic obsession over 80's properties already went too far and makes people look pathetic.

I like ghostbusters because it's fun. It's not a damn RELIGION.

Purists vs ...Taintists?

Yes, I like my fandom untainted by modern political activism and unnecessary "reimaginings" that changes everything I loved about it in the first place. People are passionate about different kinds of art, not just movies. Simply because you don't give a shit if corporate powers skew that passion purely for the sake of making money doesn't make you more superior or emotionally mature than diehard fans. If anything, it suggests that you probably didn't care that much about Ghostbusters in the first place.

If you value something for what it is. Then someone comes along and changes every quality of that thing you valued (despite calling it the exact same name) it is no longer what you valued in the first place. It doesn't say anything about a person's emotional maturity - only what they truly place value in. I'm not a music aficionado, but I could imagine that if a person's favorite band was replaced with all new band members and the style of the music changed, though they continued identifying with the same name as the former band, its diehard fanbase would understandably be irate. Why? Because they valued that particular artistic expression for what it was, and now you have imposters dragging their name through the dirt.

[Kingpin]

If anything, it suggests that you probably didn't care that much about Ghostbusters in the first place.

If you value something for what it is.

People who are looking forward to seeing the reboot aren't any more blasé about the original franchise as people who aren't looking forward to the reboot. I really wish we could move past this ridiculous "you're not a true enough/big enough/loyal enough fan" garbage.

[BatDan]

Actually, this is better than I could have hoped because even if the movie isn't great, it's spurring geeks to show their true colors.

Everyone who rages and froths about this movie is another person I know to avoid. It isn't even always about gender - the type of person who feels actual anger and hurt over a reboot being too different is the kind of person I don't need to associate with because they clearly aren't capable of sorting their emotional priorities and haven't matured past ten years old. Nostalgic geek culture is pure poison. Even without its sexism and racism (which very definitely exist,) the fetishistic obsession over 80's properties already went too far and makes people look pathetic.

I like ghostbusters because it's fun. It's not a damn RELIGION.

Purists vs ...Taintists?

Yes, I like my fandom untainted by modern political activism and unnecessary "reimaginings" that changes everything I loved about it in the first place. People are passionate about different kinds of art, not just movies. Simply because you don't give a shit if corporate powers skew that passion purely for the sake of making money doesn't make you more superior or emotionally mature than diehard fans. If anything, it suggests that you probably didn't care that much about Ghostbusters in the first place.

If you value something for what it is. Then someone comes along and changes every quality of that thing you valued (despite calling it the exact same name) it is no longer what you valued in the first place. It doesn't say anything about a person's emotional maturity - only what they truly place value in. I'm not a music aficionado, but I could imagine that if a person's favorite band was replaced with all new band members and the style of the music changed, though they continued identifying with the same name as the former band, its diehard fanbase would understandably be irate. Why? Because they valued that particular artistic expression for what it was, and now you have imposters dragging their name through the dirt.

Agreed.

I just don't understand how finding a remake of a classic film insulting, is something to be looked down upon.

It's those writers, and those actors, and filmmakers at that time and place, coming together and making a good movie. (and im speaking on behalf of any great movie). Im a fan of the movie, because im a fan of THOSE filmmakers.

Now, some schmo is hired to remake it and any criticism is unjust as being a 'negative nancy' or 'whiney fanboy".....haha yea, okay.

The reboot is obvious name-branding at its finest, sorry but it is. it's as shallow as a puddle.

"But! Gb2 and RGB were cashgrabs too!" yeah, but they still maintained the same spirit and substance as the original film.

[JurorNo.2]

OK, people, this is not Nazi Germany marching into France and demanding everyone start singing "Watch over the Rhine"! This is a freakin Hollywood movie getting a reboot. Priorities ARE a bit screwy here.

Furthermore, this isn't Ghostbusters: Special Edition. The originals are intact and perfectly fine. Nothing has been tainted.

Let's be honest here, it's not the reboot some fans are afraid of. They're afraid the viewing public will start to prefer the reboot over the originals. To those fans I say, have a little faith in your favorite movie. And have a little faith in other people.

[Raystantz Italy]

It's like Hollywood making a Laurel and Hardy fanta-biopic and portraying them as two sex and cocaine addicted bums. Sure, the real ones are still intact (sort of) but it would be outrageous.

[JurorNo.2]

It's like Hollywood making a Laurel and Hardy fanta-biopic and portraying them as two sex and cocaine addicted bums.

Hmm, yes. Well, which part isn't true?

Sure, the real ones are still intact (sort of) but it would be outrageous.

Then it would be just another outrageous chapter in that franchise's history. Every franchise has them.

[Egon's Pompadour]

Let's be honest here, it's not the reboot some fans are afraid of. They're afraid the viewing public will start to prefer the reboot over the originals. To those fans I say, have a little faith in your favorite movie. And have a little faith in other people.

Um...no. Nobody is concerned the public will prefer this shitfest over the originals. The problem a lot of fans have is that something we love is now being associated with something we hate. And it's hijacking the name and likeness of Ghostbusters like some kind of parody.

[JurorNo.2]

Um...no. Nobody is concerned the public will prefer this shitfest over the originals.

Then there's nothing to be angry about.

The problem a lot of fans have is that something we hate is now being associated with something we love.

...Because that's never happened before?

Because frankly, that's already happened for me. I hate that the toxic side of fandom is associated with a movie I love (not singling out anyone here). Still, that doesn't mean the movie is tainted for me.

[featofstrength]

The use of the word "toxic" in this forum lately...

[pyhasanon]

How else would you describe it?

[Alphagaia]

I just don't understand how finding a remake of a classic film insulting, is something to be looked down upon.

It's those writers, and those actors, and filmmakers at that time and place, coming together and making a good movie. (and im speaking on behalf of any great movie). Im a fan of the movie, because im a fan of THOSE filmmakers.

Sometimes, a fresh director with a fresh crew can do good things. Look at how George handled the prequels and how Star wars 7 was done. Look how Indy4 was handled.

Not saying GB16 will be such a hit as SW7, or as bad as Indy4, but we had many people writing succesfull GB lore before, think cartoons and IDW comics and with Dan and Ivan helping out by giving ideas and stuff like the technobabble, I think we can give the movie a fair chance to proof itself in that regard.

[CPU64]

I'm treating this movie the same way I did the nightmare on elm st remake. It was a pretty cool movie, jut not a pretty cool Freddy movie.
To me this movie will be a pretty cool ghost movie, just not a Ghostbusters movie. More like the scream parodies

[WhoaFoogles]

I do appreciate the ironic use of the previous franchise-ruining Ghostbusters iteration to make this point.

[pyhasanon]

I do appreciate the ironic use of the previous franchise-ruining Ghostbusters iteration to make this point.

Not sure I get your point...

[BatDan]

I just don't understand how finding a remake of a classic film insulting, is something to be looked down upon.

It's those writers, and those actors, and filmmakers at that time and place, coming together and making a good movie. (and im speaking on behalf of any great movie). Im a fan of the movie, because im a fan of THOSE filmmakers.

Sometimes, a fresh director with a fresh crew can do good things. Look at how George handled the prequels and how Star wars 7 was done. Look how Indy4 was handled.

Not saying GB16 will be such a hit as SW7, or as bad as Indy4, but we had many people writing succesfull GB lore before, think cartoons and IDW comics and with Dan and Ivan helping out by giving ideas and stuff like the technobabble, I think we can give the movie a fair chance to proof itself in that regard.

a fair point.

But, all those SW and Indy films were all in set within the official lore, continuity, and story of said universe, even with new directors/writers ( i believe each Indy film had different writers) . Not remade. what made SW7 a success was because it opened up for the future while still keeping connection with the past having the original characters (han, lea, luke, etc. ) that people loved returning.

Again, the writers of the IDW series, are sticking close to the source material and keeping within the original feel and characters..without even the help of Ivan or Dan.

[SpaceBallz]

Passionate fans not wanting their franchise rebooted with new characters and cast with no connection to the originals is now considered "toxic." Sorry guys, we have to like everything with the GB name on it or we are "part of the problem."

[JurorNo.2]

OK, you don't want something. Cool. And?

[WhoaFoogles]

I do appreciate the ironic use of the previous franchise-ruining Ghostbusters iteration to make this point.

Not sure I get your point...

EGB was announced to a similar vitriolic response. The reboot hate is ten times worse, but back when EGB was a fresh new face for Ghostbusters after a 7-year content draught the fans hated the weird new equipment and different characters. It's only been in the last few years that I've started seeing more widespread appreciation for EGB.

Passionate fans not wanting their franchise rebooted with new characters and cast with no connection to the originals is now considered "toxic." Sorry guys, we have to like everything with the GB name on it or we are "part of the problem."

No, the people suggesting that pro-rebooters "don't really care about Ghostbusters" or the ones shaming cosplayers in reboot costumes are toxic. Most of the anti-reboot crowd on these boards is pretty level-headed.

[d_osborn]

Passionate fans not wanting their franchise rebooted with new characters and cast with no connection to the originals is now considered "toxic." Sorry guys, we have to like everything with the GB name on it or we are "part of the problem."

No, haters constantly complaining and spewing vitriolic hate is toxic. Merriam-Webster describes it as "extremely harsh, malicious, or harmful".

Passionate fans not wanting their franchise rebooted with new characters and cast with no connection to the originals is just considered "closed minded". We're still status quo on that one.

[pyhasanon]

Passionate fans not wanting their franchise rebooted with new characters and cast with no connection to the originals is now considered "toxic." Sorry guys, we have to like everything with the GB name on it or we are "part of the problem."

As the others mentioned above, not all of the anti-reboot people are considered "toxic", just the variety that can't state an opinion without being rude and disrespectful towards others... There are reasonable anti-reboot people out there, they're not toxic, they're just normal people who have an opinion...

[featofstrength]

Vitriolic! Moar...moar fantastic adjectives!


Could you imagine a fandom that was totally onboard with the direction their franchise was headed?

[d_osborn]

Vitriolic! Moar...moar fantastic adjectives!

I don't mind communicating with colorful screens from The Simpsons if it helps you out.

It's not about being totally on-board with where the property is headed-- it's about the endless complaining and whining. Have you ever had that friend that just wouldn't stop whining about an ex for months on end?

[Alphagaia]

Sometimes, a fresh director with a fresh crew can do good things. Look at how George handled the prequels and how Star wars 7 was done. Look how Indy4 was handled.

Not saying GB16 will be such a hit as SW7, or as bad as Indy4, but we had many people writing succesfull GB lore before, think cartoons and IDW comics and with Dan and Ivan helping out by giving ideas and stuff like the technobabble, I think we can give the movie a fair chance to proof itself in that regard.

a fair point.

But, all those SW and Indy films were all in set within the official lore, continuity, and story of said universe, even with new directors/writers ( i believe each Indy film had different writers) . Not remade. what made SW7 a success was because it opened up for the future while still keeping connection with the past having the original characters (han, lea, luke, etc. ) that people loved returning.

Again, the writers of the IDW series, are sticking close to the source material and keeping within the original feel and characters..without even the help of Ivan or Dan.

And? That still does not mean the film automatically has a bad story. I get that ultimately for most people the biggest hurdle is that it's a reboot, but you pointed out only the original crew can make successful stories in a franchise which I disproved with those examples.

Reboot wise this movie covers new ground with updated gear, new characters and a different origin story, which is new, different and still has to proof itself in one big story. I get that most people want ties to the established lore, but I'm just considering it as a different timeline in a multiverse where Ivo shandor had different plans scheduled so the original team never were formed because his timetable is different. Now, in the other timeline it happened like GB1 and and maybe the paths will cross someday, but that's for Easter eggs, after credits or a sequel. This movie can proof itself without adding to the original timeline.

[featofstrength]

Vitriolic! Moar...moar fantastic adjectives!

I don't mind communicating with colorful screens from The Simpsons if it helps you out.

It's not about being totally on-board with where the property is headed-- it's about the endless complaining and whining. Have you ever had that friend that just wouldn't stop whining about an ex for months on end?

Your complaints about complaining are intriguing to me, and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

[Kingpin]

Sooner or later, both camps are going to need to disarm in order to get along. I gladly look forward to the day that the community cold war is finally brought to an end.